Stock which has 200,000 volume on average daily was traded 608,000 in one day when the High=Low=Close=Open. Isn't that weird? How come this much higher volume activity did not affected the price at all?

In the US, price limits are imposed on the trading of futures and options, while in some Asian stock markets such as China, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea and Thailand, price limits are imposed on the trading of stocks.

The price limit rule in Chinese stock market, for example, allows each stock to fluctuate on any given trading day within a predetermined range (+/-10%) based on the previous trading day's close price of that stock Even if price limit being reached, trades can still occur on that stock in that day's trading session (that differs from futures where trading activity stops when price limit is hit).

Martina wrote:Stock which has 200,000 volume on average daily was traded 608,000 in one day when the High=Low=Close=Open. Isn't that weird? How come this much higher volume activity did not affected the price at all?

The human element, namely the specialist/market maker. In contrast to futures, stocks are merchandised. Paper negotiable financial instruments carried on the balance sheet at par.

Volume without price progress is churn. In this instance, pure churn.

Perhaps a cross trade, but transactions between member firms (NYSE) do not have to appear on tape (unless they so choose). Hmmm, making an illusion? I'm not familiar with Nasdaq rules, but it wouldn't suprise me IF Naz was similiar.

Negotiated blocks, often with concessions, most likely involve the specialist on one side or the other and obviously consulted BEFOREHAND.

There is one possiblity that has not been mentioned. Occasionally stocks trade significant volume at a price or within a tiny range as a temporary equilibrium has been reached. This is the wet dream for participants with large orders. I have seen it through the eyes of a market maker over the years. It doesn't happen alot, but such activity can easily exist without the presumed chicanery. I have also seem blocks of staggering size - mutiples of ave daily vol - hit the tape when the stars line up just right. No nonsense, just a rare event.

Whether the "high" volume is from fragmented participants or blocks of staggering size the implication is a portion of the aggregate instrument is changing hands, with the seller(s) willing to incur a taxable event and perhaps alieviate stress and............a buyer incurring FRESH risk.

More imporantly, does this "high" volume have predictive quatilies?

Anything is possible, including rare events. I personally prefer dealing in probabilities rather than possiblities, and..................I transact in PRICE, the common denominator.

Or the buyer could be closing out an existing short, while the seller is establishing a new short. In this case it is the seller who is incurring fresh risk and the buyer who is incurring a taxable event.

Or a new long could trade with a new short, in which case both are incurring fresh risk while neither is incurring a taxable event.

Or, in the fourth case, the buyer could be closing out an existing short while the seller is closing out an existing long. In this case neither one incurs fresh risk but both are incurring a taxable event.

I do know for sure that it was pre-arranged trade. I see it every day in israeli stock market. Funds can buy/sell millions of shares on the base price and of course it won't affect the close . Simple as that

edward kim wrote:

kianti wrote:It was a "cross" transaction or a pre-arranged trade.

do you know for sure that it is one of those two events? what makes you certain that the quote data you see is correct?

usually these kinda transactions appear during the end of the down move or up move, so I'd say they do have predictive qualities. Stocks trading is the dirtiest thing I've ever seen.

efficiency wrote:Whether the "high" volume is from fragmented participants or blocks of staggering size the implication is a portion of the aggregate instrument is changing hands, with the seller(s) willing to incur a taxable event and perhaps alieviate stress and............a buyer incurring FRESH risk.

More imporantly, does this "high" volume have predictive quatilies?

Anything is possible, including rare events. I personally prefer dealing in probabilities rather than possiblities, and..................I transact in PRICE, the common denominator.

Allright, I'll concede could be a buyer covering a short. But, IF that's the case, it's volume.......... WITHOUT accumulation. Merely being "put back" where it was and POOF one owner rather than two for the same portion of the instrument.

As for a PURE offset between a buyer(s) and a seller(s) (and no taxable event), for this to occur, there would have to be a PURE absence of a market maker (i.e limit orders and the time needed to fill). Not completely plausible in a "high" volume scenario.

I'll stick to my guns that volume has little in the way of predictive qualities unless one can reliably discern WHO has the paper.

When is capitulation,capitulation???? Guessing at it have proved to be the demise of many. Or transforming traders into investors.

Isn't debate fun? It's what makes a market. Along with greed. And fear.